NRL coaches should have to have a degree in communication

[unforgiven]

If you've been watching long enough to notice changes over 15 years then it's a little surprising you'd need it explained. Basically any change is to increase the chances of winning.

Slower rucks = more time to set your defensive line.

Decoy runners, when done right, aren't decoys they are options. Running a play with 3 legitimate possible receivers poses a lot more questions than just 1. This seems obvious.

Exactly right, the changes are quite simple. I agree on the when done right part in your decoy runners summation. I will add that a lot of teams do not do these plays right and they do not have 3 genuine receivers, for these teams the decoy runners are more of a blocker than a decoy. I am over these type of plays in the game as they are too heavily relied on at present.

 

[AJB1102]

Exactly right, the changes are quite simple. I agree on the when done right part in your decoy runners summation. I will add that a lot of teams do not do these plays right and they do not have 3 genuine receivers, for these teams the decoy runners are more of a blocker than a decoy. I am over these type of plays in the game as they are too heavily relied on at present.

I agree and think we handle it pretty well. For the majority of cases if the decoy or "unused option" doesn't clear through the line it's no try/obstruction. The block plays really don't work much anymore and are either stopped by the defense identifying and ignoring the blockers or running into them to have the refs call it up.

 

[unforgiven]

I agree and think we handle it pretty well. For the majority of cases if the decoy or "unused option" doesn't clear through the line it's no try/obstruction. The block plays really don't work much anymore and are either stopped by the defense identifying and ignoring the blockers or running into them to have the refs call it up.

As long as we stay consistent about the player having to catch the ball on the outside of the decoy I'm usually pretty happy.

 

[T-Boon]

As long as we stay consistent about the player having to catch the ball on the outside of the decoy I'm usually pretty happy.

It all seems like off side to me. I liked when Daniel Anderson was head of refs and he told the refs to call them more often. Coaches did not like that (but again never really said anything constructive). Decoys are one of the ugliest development in the game and the coaches should explain why so many are necessary.
Problem is I don't think they could explain it.

 

[AJB1102]

It all seems like off side to me. I liked when Daniel Anderson was head of refs and he told the refs to call them more often. Coaches did not like that (but again never really said anything constructive). Decoys are one of the ugliest development in the game and the coaches should explain why so many are necessary.
Problem is I don't think they could explain it.

I explained it like 4 posts ago.

Coaches aren't employed to explain the game to fans.

 

[T-Boon]

I explained it like 4 posts ago.

Coaches aren't employed to explain the game to fans.

I rejected that explanation.

 

[T-Boon]

Anyone see that article in the Sun Herald yesterday by some journalist named Breen which virtually quoted this thread and what I have said above re coaches talking to the fans/promoting the game through the media and needing to do a much better job.

 

[The Vaulting Violinist]

Also, look at how successful the Tigers were when coached by that master orator Alan Jones.

Was good with his mouth

 

[T-Boon]

Also, look at how successful the Tigers were when coached by that master orator Alan Jones.

What I am saying though is take good coaches and make them better orators/salesmen not take orators/salesmen and try to turn them into coaches.

 

[Captain Apollo]

Its not the 60's any more. The game was semi pro then.

Your reply shows you don't know much about the history of the game then. Jack Gibson was a man of few words, but he spoke to the press quite often and was not adverse to seeking publicity for the game. He was quite open and honest about things.

 

[T-Boon]

Your reply shows you don't know much about the history of the game then. Jack Gibson was a man of few words, but he spoke to the press quite often and was not adverse to seeking publicity for the game. He was quite open and honest about things.

There is a lot bout Jack I don't know, but I liked him. He looked to the NFL a lot from what I understand and I think our code should be doing that now.

 

[unforgiven]

I rejected that explanation.

Only because you don't understand the game, the decoy runners are there to make defenders make a choice about which player to tackle in the hope they make the wrong choice or the ball player can take advantage of that choice. As long as the player receiving the ball catches it on the outside of the decoy and the decoy doesn't interfere with the defensive line. What else is there to understand?

 

[T-Boon]

"If the NRL is to truely win the war on player behaviour, and then convert that victory into a more positive media image, then the culture it needs to infiltrate is that of the coaches"

Neil Breen The Sun Herald 4 March 2019

 

[T-Boon]

"Coaches are the true leaders of clubs. Speaking to the fans through media isnt that "tough".
Ask Brad Fittler - he made the Blues do it and it worked a treat"

Neil Breen The Sun Herald 4 March 2019

Has he been reading this thread?

 

[AJB1102]

"Coaches are the true leaders of clubs. Speaking to the fans through media isnt that "tough".
Ask Brad Fittler - he made the Blues do it and it worked a treat"

Neil Breen The Sun Herald 4 March 2019

Has he been reading this thread?

Probably.

An NRL.com journo made up a whole paragraph about our coach being so happy to see our winger Sione Katoa score his first try for us in the trial. The journo had mixed up our Katoa with Penrith's, so clearly made up the coach's feelings.

I'd be more inclined to rethink my position if a journo agreed with it than use it to bolster my argument. They're clueless gossip columnists who can quote tweets, not RL reporters who can analyse a game.

 

[T-Boon]

the decoy runners are there to make defenders make a choice about which player to tackle in the hope they make the wrong choice or the ball player can take advantage of that choice. As long as the player receiving the ball catches it on the outside of the decoy and the decoy doesn't interfere with the defensive line. What else is there to understand?

I think the real reason for the increase in decoy running is that defenses have gotten better which is in part because attacks have gotten more conservative. Decoy running fits in with conservative attack (risk free attack) because it is a way of trying to make line breaks without taking any risk.

 

[unforgiven]

I think the real reason for the increase in decoy running is that defenses have gotten better which is in part because attacks have gotten more conservative. Decoy running fits in with conservative attack (risk free attack) because it is a way of trying to make line breaks without taking any risk.

Defenses have gotten better due to fulltime professionalism, the structures that teams use now are very difficult to break down. Teams are definately too reliant on the play.

 

[Willie Ray]

Your reply shows you don't know much about the history of the game then. Jack Gibson was a man of few words, but he spoke to the press quite often and was not adverse to seeking publicity for the game. He was quite open and honest about things.

What a great man Jack was....spoke so little yet said so much...
the game sure could use his wisdom and leadership right now.